Vegetarian Diet Essay Example For Students

Vegetarian Diet Essay The Vegetarian Diet Essay is becoming increasingly popular all the time. Is the vegetarian or meat diet better? A decade ago and earlier, the impression was that a vegetarian diet was lacking in the nutrients found in meat products. Today though, through research and nutritional science, it has been proven that all the nutrients found in meat can also be found in the correct vegetarian diet. Some may argue that by only consuming meat that is low in fat, meat and vegetarian diets have identical benefits. This is true only if one eats only very low fat meat. The lack of meat is not necessarily the main benefit of to the vegetarian. Vegetarians tend to eat more fruits, vegetables and grains that the meat eater. They also tend not to use tobacco and excessive alcohol. In addition, vegetarians tend to get more exercise. The term vegetarian can be misleading. This diet can take on many different variations. A fruitarian eats only fruits, seeds and nuts while the vegan eats these and vegetables, grains and legumes. A lacto vegetarian consumes the same as a vegan as well as dairy products. A lacto-ovo vegetarian follows after the lacto vegetarian but also includes eggs while the ovo vegetarian excludes dairy products. Finally, the partial vegetarian eats anything except red meat, or at least strictly limits it. Because the term vegetarian is used to cover all facets and variations, it is difficult to identify health benefits resulting from the vegetarian diet including all of the above. Most meat eaters do not realize that there are so many variations to the vegetarian diet, which makes accurate studies even more difficult. We will write a custom essay on Vegetarian Diet specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now As a whole though, vegetarians tend to have less body fat than nonvegetarians. This is most likely due to the low fat and high carbohydrate content of their diet. Vegetarians usually have lower blood pressure than meat eaters because of lifestyle and diet. Other factors probably include exercise and resistance to smoking and alcohol intake. Coronary artery disease is directly related to saturated fat intake. In studies testing cholesterol levels, vegetarians beat out all others including those that only ate lean meats. Milk, however, lowers blood cholesterol, as does soy. Another benefit is the lack of digestive disorders among vegetarians. It is possible that this is directly related to the high fiber content consumed. The last main benefit of the vegetarian diet is its relationship to cancer rate reduction, especially colon cancer. People who develop colon cancer tend to eat more meat, less fiber, and more saturated fat than those without colon cancer. This is the same case with lymphatic cancer. The only advantage a meat eater might have over a vegetarian would be during pregnancy and childhood. Studies have shown that children grow best when they eat meat products. Likewise, vegetarian women may enter pregnancy too thin and be lacking in stores of nutrients. Obviously, there are advantages and drawbacks to both diets however I feel the vegetarian diets advantages greatly outweigh its shortcomings. Whether a meat eater or vegetarian, both diets can contribute to good health with proper planning. Health Care .

Music and Math essays

Music and Math essays "Music is the harmonization of opposites, the unification of disparate things, and the conciliation of warring elements...Music is the basis of agreement among things in nature and of the best government in the universe. As a rule it assumes the guise of harmony in the universe, of lawful government in a state, and of a sensible way of life in the home. It brings together and unites." - The Pythagoreans. Every school student will recognize his name as the originator of that theorem which offers many cheerful facts about the square on the hypotenuse. Many European philosophers will call him the father of philosophy. Many scientists will call him the father of science. To musicians, nonetheless, Pythagoras is the father of music. According to Johnston, it was a much told story that one day the young Pythagoras was passing a blacksmiths shop and his ear was caught by the regular intervals of sounds from the anvil. When he discovered that the hammers were of different weights, it occurred to him that the intervals might be related to those weights. Pythagoras was correct. Pythagorean philosophy maintained that all things are numbers. Based on the belief that numbers were the building blocks of everything, Pythagoras began linking numbers and music. Revolutionizing music, Pythagoras findings generated theorems and standards for musical scales, relationships, instruments and creative formation. Musical scales became defined and taught. Instrument makers began a precision approach to device construction. Composers developed new attitudes of composition that encompassed a foundation of numeric value in addition to melody. All three of these approaches were based on Pythagorean philosophy. Thus, Pythagoras relationship between numbers and music had a profound influence on future musical education, instrumentation, and composition. The intrinsic discovery made by Pythagoras was the potential order to the chaos o...

The Kostenki Archaeological Sites

The Kostenki Archaeological Sites Kostenki refers to a complex of open-air archaeological sites located in the Pokrovsky Valley of Russia, on the west bank of the Don River, about 400 kilometers (250 miles) south of Moscow and 40 km (25 mi) south of the city of Voronezh, Russia. Together, they contain important evidence concerning the timing and complexity of the various waves of anatomically modern humans as they left Africa some 100,000 or more years ago The main site (Kostenki 14, see page 2) is located near the mouth of a small steep ravine; the upper reaches of this ravine contain evidence of a handful of other Upper Paleolithic occupations. The Kostenki sites lie deeply buried (between 10-20 meters [30-60 feet]) beneath the modern surface. The sites were buried by alluvium which was deposited by the Don River and its tributaries beginning at least 50,000 years ago. Terrace Stratigraphy The occupations at Kostenki include several Late Early Upper Paleolithic levels, dated between 42,000 to 30,000 calibrated years ago (cal BP). Smack dab in the middle of those levels is a layer of volcanic ash, associated with the volcanic eruptions of the Phlegrean Fields of Italy (aka Campanian Ignimbrite or CI Tephra), which erupted about 39,300 cal BP. The stratigraphic sequence at the Kostenki sites are broadly described as containing six main units: Modern levels at the top: black, highly humic soil with abundant bioturbation, churning by living animals, in this case mainly burrowing by rodents.Cover Loam: loess-like deposit with several stacked occupations dated to the Eastern Gravettian (such as Kostenki 1 at 29,000 cal BP; and Epi-Gravettian (Kostenki 11, 14,000-19,000 cal BP)Upper Humic Complex/Bed (UHB): yellowish chalky loam with several stacked occupations, early and mid-Upper Paleolithic, including Initial Upper Paleolithic, Aurignacian, Gravettian and local GorodsovianWhitish Loam: homogenous loam with some sub-horizontal lamination and in the lower part in situ or reworked volcanic ash (CI Tephra, independently dated 39,300 years agoLower Humic Complex/Bed (LHB): stratified loamy deposits with several stacked horizons, early and mid-Upper Paleolithic, including Initial Upper Paleolithic, Aurignacian, Gravettian and local Gorodsovian (similar to UHB)Chalky Loam: upper alluvium stratified with coarse deposits Controversy: Late Early Upper Paleolithic at Kostenki In 2007, the excavators at Kostenki (Anikovich et al.) reported that they had identified occupation levels within and below the ash level. They found the remnants of the Early Upper Paleolithic culture called the Aurignacian Dufour, numerous small bladelets quite similar to lithic tools found in similarly dated sites in western Europe. Prior to Kostenki, the Aurignacian sequence was considered the oldest component associated with modern humans at archaeological sites in Europe, underlain by Mousterian-like deposits representing Neanderthals. At Kostenki, a sophisticated tool kit of prismatic blades, burins, bone antler, and ivory artifacts, and small perforated shell ornaments lies below the CI Tephra and Aurignacian Dufour assemblage: these were identified as an earlier presence of modern humans in Eurasia than previously recognized. The discovery of modern human cultural material below the tephra was quite controversial at the time it was reported, and a debate about the context and date of the tephra arose. That debate was a complex one, best addressed elsewhere. Read more about the Pre-Aurignacian deposits at Kostenki Comments from John Hoffecker concerning initial criticism of the age of the site Since 2007, additional sites such as Byzovaya and Mamontovaya Kurya have lent additional support to the presence of early modern human occupations of the eastern Plains of Russia. Kostenki 14, also known as Markina Gora, is the main site at Kostenki, and it has been found to contain genetic evidence concerning the migration of early modern humans from Africa into Eurasia. Markina Gora is located on the flank of a ravine cut into one of the river terraces. The site covers hundred of meters of sediment within seven cultural levels. Cultural Layer (CL) I, in the Cover Loam, 26,500-27,600 cal BP, Kostenki-Avdeevo cultureCL II, within the Upper Humic Bed (UHB), 31,500-33,600 cal BP, Gorodsovian, mid Upper Paleolithic mammoth bone industryCL III, UHB, 33,200-35,300 cal BP, blade-based and bone industry, Gorodsovian, Mid Upper PaleolithicLVA (layer in volcanic ash, 39,300 cal BP), small assemblage, unipolar blades and Dufour bladelets, AurignacianCL IV in the Lower Humic Bed (LHB), older than the tephra, undiagnostic blade-dominated industryCL IVa, LHB, 36,000-39,100, a few lithics, large numbers of horse bones (at least 50 individual animals)Fossil Soil, LHB, 37,500-40,800 cal BPCL IVb, LHB, 39,900-42,200 cal BP, distinctive Upper Paleolithic, endscrapers, possible horse head out of carved mammoth ivory, human tooth (EMH) A complete early modern human skeleton was recovered from Kostenki 14 in 1954, buried in a tightly flexed position in a oval burial pit (99x39 centimeters or 39x15 inches) which had been dug through the ash layer and then was sealed by Cultural Layer III. The skeleton was direct-dated to 36,262-38,684 cal BP. The skeleton represents an adult man, 20-25 years old with a robust skull and short stature (1.6 meters [5 foot 3 inches]). A few stone flakes, animal bones and a sprinkle of dark red pigment were found in the burial pit. Based on its location within the strata, the skeleton can be generally dated to the Early Upper Paleolithic period. Genomic Sequence from Markina Gora Skeleton In 2014, Eske Willerslev and associates (Seguin-Orlando et al) reported the genomic structure of the skeleton at Markina Gora. They perfomed 12 DNA extractions from the skeletons left arm bone, and compared the sequence to the growing numbers of ancient and modern DNA. They identified genetic relationships between Kostenki 14 and Neanderthalsmore evidence that early modern humans and Neanderthals interbredas well as genetic connections to the Malta individual from Siberia and European Neolithic farmers. Further, they found a fairly distant relationship to Australo-Melanesian or eastern Asian populations. The Markina Gora skeletons DNA indicates a deep-aged human migration out of Africa separate from that of Asian populations, supporting the Southern Dispersal Route as a possible corridor for population of those areas. All humans are derived from the same populations in Africa; but we colonized the world in different waves and perhaps along different exit routes. The genomic data recovered from Markina Gora is further evidence that the population of our world by humans was very complex, and we have a long way to go before we understand it. Excavations at Kostenki Kostenki was discovered in 1879; and a long series of excavations have followed. Kostenki 14 was discovered by P.P. Efimenko in 1928 and has been excavated since the 1950s via a series of trenches. The oldest occupations at the site were reported in 2007, where the combination of great age and sophistication created quite a stir. Sources This glossary entry is a part of the About.com guide to Upper Paleolithic , and the Dictionary of Archaeology. Anikovich MV, Sinitsyn AA, Hoffecker JF, Holliday VT, Popov VV, Lisitsyn SN, Forman SL, Levkovskaya GM, Pospelova GA, Kuzmina IE et al. 2007. Early Upper Paleolithic in Eastern Europe and Implications for the Dispersal of Modern Humans. Science 315(5809):223-226. Hoffecker JF. 2011. The early upper Paleolithic of eastern Europe reconsidered. Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews 20(1):24-39. Revedin A, Aranguren B, Becattini R, Longo L, Marconi E, Mariotti Lippi M, Skakun N, Sinitsyn A, Spiridonova E, and Svoboda J. 2010. Thirty thousand-year-old evidence of plant food processing. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107(44):18815-18819. Seguin-Orlando A, Korneliussen TS, Sikora M, Malaspinas A-S, Manica A, Moltke I, Albrechtsen A, Ko A, Margaryan A, Moiseyev V et al. 2014. Genomic structure in Europeans dating back at least 36,200 years. ScienceExpress 6 November 2014(6 November 2014) doi: 10.1126/science.aaa0114. Soffer O, Adovasio JM, Illingworth JS, Amirkhanov H, Praslov ND, and Street M. 2000. Palaeolithic perishables made permanent. Antiquity 74:812-821. Svendsen JI, Heggen HP, Hufthammer AK, Mangerud J, Pavlov P, and Roebroeks W. 2010. Geo-archaeological investigations of Palaeolithic sites along the Ural Mountains - On the northern presence of humans during the last Ice Age. Quaternary Science Reviews 29(23-24):3138-3156. Svoboda JA. 2007. The Gravettian on the Middle Danube. Paleobiology 19:203-220. Velichko AA, Pisareva VV, Sedov SN, Sinitsyn AA, and Timireva SN. 2009. Paleogeography of Kostenki-14 (Markina Gora). Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia 37(4):35-50. doi: 10.1016/j.aeae.2010.02.002

The Kostenki Archaeological Sites

The Kostenki Archaeological Sites Kostenki refers to a complex of open-air archaeological sites located in the Pokrovsky Valley of Russia, on the west bank of the Don River, about 400 kilometers (250 miles) south of Moscow and 40 km (25 mi) south of the city of Voronezh, Russia. Together, they contain important evidence concerning the timing and complexity of the various waves of anatomically modern humans as they left Africa some 100,000 or more years ago The main site (Kostenki 14, see page 2) is located near the mouth of a small steep ravine; the upper reaches of this ravine contain evidence of a handful of other Upper Paleolithic occupations. The Kostenki sites lie deeply buried (between 10-20 meters [30-60 feet]) beneath the modern surface. The sites were buried by alluvium which was deposited by the Don River and its tributaries beginning at least 50,000 years ago. Terrace Stratigraphy The occupations at Kostenki include several Late Early Upper Paleolithic levels, dated between 42,000 to 30,000 calibrated years ago (cal BP). Smack dab in the middle of those levels is a layer of volcanic ash, associated with the volcanic eruptions of the Phlegrean Fields of Italy (aka Campanian Ignimbrite or CI Tephra), which erupted about 39,300 cal BP. The stratigraphic sequence at the Kostenki sites are broadly described as containing six main units: Modern levels at the top: black, highly humic soil with abundant bioturbation, churning by living animals, in this case mainly burrowing by rodents.Cover Loam: loess-like deposit with several stacked occupations dated to the Eastern Gravettian (such as Kostenki 1 at 29,000 cal BP; and Epi-Gravettian (Kostenki 11, 14,000-19,000 cal BP)Upper Humic Complex/Bed (UHB): yellowish chalky loam with several stacked occupations, early and mid-Upper Paleolithic, including Initial Upper Paleolithic, Aurignacian, Gravettian and local GorodsovianWhitish Loam: homogenous loam with some sub-horizontal lamination and in the lower part in situ or reworked volcanic ash (CI Tephra, independently dated 39,300 years agoLower Humic Complex/Bed (LHB): stratified loamy deposits with several stacked horizons, early and mid-Upper Paleolithic, including Initial Upper Paleolithic, Aurignacian, Gravettian and local Gorodsovian (similar to UHB)Chalky Loam: upper alluvium stratified with coarse deposits Controversy: Late Early Upper Paleolithic at Kostenki In 2007, the excavators at Kostenki (Anikovich et al.) reported that they had identified occupation levels within and below the ash level. They found the remnants of the Early Upper Paleolithic culture called the Aurignacian Dufour, numerous small bladelets quite similar to lithic tools found in similarly dated sites in western Europe. Prior to Kostenki, the Aurignacian sequence was considered the oldest component associated with modern humans at archaeological sites in Europe, underlain by Mousterian-like deposits representing Neanderthals. At Kostenki, a sophisticated tool kit of prismatic blades, burins, bone antler, and ivory artifacts, and small perforated shell ornaments lies below the CI Tephra and Aurignacian Dufour assemblage: these were identified as an earlier presence of modern humans in Eurasia than previously recognized. The discovery of modern human cultural material below the tephra was quite controversial at the time it was reported, and a debate about the context and date of the tephra arose. That debate was a complex one, best addressed elsewhere. Read more about the Pre-Aurignacian deposits at Kostenki Comments from John Hoffecker concerning initial criticism of the age of the site Since 2007, additional sites such as Byzovaya and Mamontovaya Kurya have lent additional support to the presence of early modern human occupations of the eastern Plains of Russia. Kostenki 14, also known as Markina Gora, is the main site at Kostenki, and it has been found to contain genetic evidence concerning the migration of early modern humans from Africa into Eurasia. Markina Gora is located on the flank of a ravine cut into one of the river terraces. The site covers hundred of meters of sediment within seven cultural levels. Cultural Layer (CL) I, in the Cover Loam, 26,500-27,600 cal BP, Kostenki-Avdeevo cultureCL II, within the Upper Humic Bed (UHB), 31,500-33,600 cal BP, Gorodsovian, mid Upper Paleolithic mammoth bone industryCL III, UHB, 33,200-35,300 cal BP, blade-based and bone industry, Gorodsovian, Mid Upper PaleolithicLVA (layer in volcanic ash, 39,300 cal BP), small assemblage, unipolar blades and Dufour bladelets, AurignacianCL IV in the Lower Humic Bed (LHB), older than the tephra, undiagnostic blade-dominated industryCL IVa, LHB, 36,000-39,100, a few lithics, large numbers of horse bones (at least 50 individual animals)Fossil Soil, LHB, 37,500-40,800 cal BPCL IVb, LHB, 39,900-42,200 cal BP, distinctive Upper Paleolithic, endscrapers, possible horse head out of carved mammoth ivory, human tooth (EMH) A complete early modern human skeleton was recovered from Kostenki 14 in 1954, buried in a tightly flexed position in a oval burial pit (99x39 centimeters or 39x15 inches) which had been dug through the ash layer and then was sealed by Cultural Layer III. The skeleton was direct-dated to 36,262-38,684 cal BP. The skeleton represents an adult man, 20-25 years old with a robust skull and short stature (1.6 meters [5 foot 3 inches]). A few stone flakes, animal bones and a sprinkle of dark red pigment were found in the burial pit. Based on its location within the strata, the skeleton can be generally dated to the Early Upper Paleolithic period. Genomic Sequence from Markina Gora Skeleton In 2014, Eske Willerslev and associates (Seguin-Orlando et al) reported the genomic structure of the skeleton at Markina Gora. They perfomed 12 DNA extractions from the skeletons left arm bone, and compared the sequence to the growing numbers of ancient and modern DNA. They identified genetic relationships between Kostenki 14 and Neanderthalsmore evidence that early modern humans and Neanderthals interbredas well as genetic connections to the Malta individual from Siberia and European Neolithic farmers. Further, they found a fairly distant relationship to Australo-Melanesian or eastern Asian populations. The Markina Gora skeletons DNA indicates a deep-aged human migration out of Africa separate from that of Asian populations, supporting the Southern Dispersal Route as a possible corridor for population of those areas. All humans are derived from the same populations in Africa; but we colonized the world in different waves and perhaps along different exit routes. The genomic data recovered from Markina Gora is further evidence that the population of our world by humans was very complex, and we have a long way to go before we understand it. Excavations at Kostenki Kostenki was discovered in 1879; and a long series of excavations have followed. Kostenki 14 was discovered by P.P. Efimenko in 1928 and has been excavated since the 1950s via a series of trenches. The oldest occupations at the site were reported in 2007, where the combination of great age and sophistication created quite a stir. Sources This glossary entry is a part of the About.com guide to Upper Paleolithic , and the Dictionary of Archaeology. Anikovich MV, Sinitsyn AA, Hoffecker JF, Holliday VT, Popov VV, Lisitsyn SN, Forman SL, Levkovskaya GM, Pospelova GA, Kuzmina IE et al. 2007. Early Upper Paleolithic in Eastern Europe and Implications for the Dispersal of Modern Humans. Science 315(5809):223-226. Hoffecker JF. 2011. The early upper Paleolithic of eastern Europe reconsidered. Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews 20(1):24-39. Revedin A, Aranguren B, Becattini R, Longo L, Marconi E, Mariotti Lippi M, Skakun N, Sinitsyn A, Spiridonova E, and Svoboda J. 2010. Thirty thousand-year-old evidence of plant food processing. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107(44):18815-18819. Seguin-Orlando A, Korneliussen TS, Sikora M, Malaspinas A-S, Manica A, Moltke I, Albrechtsen A, Ko A, Margaryan A, Moiseyev V et al. 2014. Genomic structure in Europeans dating back at least 36,200 years. ScienceExpress 6 November 2014(6 November 2014) doi: 10.1126/science.aaa0114. Soffer O, Adovasio JM, Illingworth JS, Amirkhanov H, Praslov ND, and Street M. 2000. Palaeolithic perishables made permanent. Antiquity 74:812-821. Svendsen JI, Heggen HP, Hufthammer AK, Mangerud J, Pavlov P, and Roebroeks W. 2010. Geo-archaeological investigations of Palaeolithic sites along the Ural Mountains - On the northern presence of humans during the last Ice Age. Quaternary Science Reviews 29(23-24):3138-3156. Svoboda JA. 2007. The Gravettian on the Middle Danube. Paleobiology 19:203-220. Velichko AA, Pisareva VV, Sedov SN, Sinitsyn AA, and Timireva SN. 2009. Paleogeography of Kostenki-14 (Markina Gora). Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia 37(4):35-50. doi: 10.1016/j.aeae.2010.02.002

The Kostenki Archaeological Sites

The Kostenki Archaeological Sites Kostenki refers to a complex of open-air archaeological sites located in the Pokrovsky Valley of Russia, on the west bank of the Don River, about 400 kilometers (250 miles) south of Moscow and 40 km (25 mi) south of the city of Voronezh, Russia. Together, they contain important evidence concerning the timing and complexity of the various waves of anatomically modern humans as they left Africa some 100,000 or more years ago The main site (Kostenki 14, see page 2) is located near the mouth of a small steep ravine; the upper reaches of this ravine contain evidence of a handful of other Upper Paleolithic occupations. The Kostenki sites lie deeply buried (between 10-20 meters [30-60 feet]) beneath the modern surface. The sites were buried by alluvium which was deposited by the Don River and its tributaries beginning at least 50,000 years ago. Terrace Stratigraphy The occupations at Kostenki include several Late Early Upper Paleolithic levels, dated between 42,000 to 30,000 calibrated years ago (cal BP). Smack dab in the middle of those levels is a layer of volcanic ash, associated with the volcanic eruptions of the Phlegrean Fields of Italy (aka Campanian Ignimbrite or CI Tephra), which erupted about 39,300 cal BP. The stratigraphic sequence at the Kostenki sites are broadly described as containing six main units: Modern levels at the top: black, highly humic soil with abundant bioturbation, churning by living animals, in this case mainly burrowing by rodents.Cover Loam: loess-like deposit with several stacked occupations dated to the Eastern Gravettian (such as Kostenki 1 at 29,000 cal BP; and Epi-Gravettian (Kostenki 11, 14,000-19,000 cal BP)Upper Humic Complex/Bed (UHB): yellowish chalky loam with several stacked occupations, early and mid-Upper Paleolithic, including Initial Upper Paleolithic, Aurignacian, Gravettian and local GorodsovianWhitish Loam: homogenous loam with some sub-horizontal lamination and in the lower part in situ or reworked volcanic ash (CI Tephra, independently dated 39,300 years agoLower Humic Complex/Bed (LHB): stratified loamy deposits with several stacked horizons, early and mid-Upper Paleolithic, including Initial Upper Paleolithic, Aurignacian, Gravettian and local Gorodsovian (similar to UHB)Chalky Loam: upper alluvium stratified with coarse deposits Controversy: Late Early Upper Paleolithic at Kostenki In 2007, the excavators at Kostenki (Anikovich et al.) reported that they had identified occupation levels within and below the ash level. They found the remnants of the Early Upper Paleolithic culture called the Aurignacian Dufour, numerous small bladelets quite similar to lithic tools found in similarly dated sites in western Europe. Prior to Kostenki, the Aurignacian sequence was considered the oldest component associated with modern humans at archaeological sites in Europe, underlain by Mousterian-like deposits representing Neanderthals. At Kostenki, a sophisticated tool kit of prismatic blades, burins, bone antler, and ivory artifacts, and small perforated shell ornaments lies below the CI Tephra and Aurignacian Dufour assemblage: these were identified as an earlier presence of modern humans in Eurasia than previously recognized. The discovery of modern human cultural material below the tephra was quite controversial at the time it was reported, and a debate about the context and date of the tephra arose. That debate was a complex one, best addressed elsewhere. Read more about the Pre-Aurignacian deposits at Kostenki Comments from John Hoffecker concerning initial criticism of the age of the site Since 2007, additional sites such as Byzovaya and Mamontovaya Kurya have lent additional support to the presence of early modern human occupations of the eastern Plains of Russia. Kostenki 14, also known as Markina Gora, is the main site at Kostenki, and it has been found to contain genetic evidence concerning the migration of early modern humans from Africa into Eurasia. Markina Gora is located on the flank of a ravine cut into one of the river terraces. The site covers hundred of meters of sediment within seven cultural levels. Cultural Layer (CL) I, in the Cover Loam, 26,500-27,600 cal BP, Kostenki-Avdeevo cultureCL II, within the Upper Humic Bed (UHB), 31,500-33,600 cal BP, Gorodsovian, mid Upper Paleolithic mammoth bone industryCL III, UHB, 33,200-35,300 cal BP, blade-based and bone industry, Gorodsovian, Mid Upper PaleolithicLVA (layer in volcanic ash, 39,300 cal BP), small assemblage, unipolar blades and Dufour bladelets, AurignacianCL IV in the Lower Humic Bed (LHB), older than the tephra, undiagnostic blade-dominated industryCL IVa, LHB, 36,000-39,100, a few lithics, large numbers of horse bones (at least 50 individual animals)Fossil Soil, LHB, 37,500-40,800 cal BPCL IVb, LHB, 39,900-42,200 cal BP, distinctive Upper Paleolithic, endscrapers, possible horse head out of carved mammoth ivory, human tooth (EMH) A complete early modern human skeleton was recovered from Kostenki 14 in 1954, buried in a tightly flexed position in a oval burial pit (99x39 centimeters or 39x15 inches) which had been dug through the ash layer and then was sealed by Cultural Layer III. The skeleton was direct-dated to 36,262-38,684 cal BP. The skeleton represents an adult man, 20-25 years old with a robust skull and short stature (1.6 meters [5 foot 3 inches]). A few stone flakes, animal bones and a sprinkle of dark red pigment were found in the burial pit. Based on its location within the strata, the skeleton can be generally dated to the Early Upper Paleolithic period. Genomic Sequence from Markina Gora Skeleton In 2014, Eske Willerslev and associates (Seguin-Orlando et al) reported the genomic structure of the skeleton at Markina Gora. They perfomed 12 DNA extractions from the skeletons left arm bone, and compared the sequence to the growing numbers of ancient and modern DNA. They identified genetic relationships between Kostenki 14 and Neanderthalsmore evidence that early modern humans and Neanderthals interbredas well as genetic connections to the Malta individual from Siberia and European Neolithic farmers. Further, they found a fairly distant relationship to Australo-Melanesian or eastern Asian populations. The Markina Gora skeletons DNA indicates a deep-aged human migration out of Africa separate from that of Asian populations, supporting the Southern Dispersal Route as a possible corridor for population of those areas. All humans are derived from the same populations in Africa; but we colonized the world in different waves and perhaps along different exit routes. The genomic data recovered from Markina Gora is further evidence that the population of our world by humans was very complex, and we have a long way to go before we understand it. Excavations at Kostenki Kostenki was discovered in 1879; and a long series of excavations have followed. Kostenki 14 was discovered by P.P. Efimenko in 1928 and has been excavated since the 1950s via a series of trenches. The oldest occupations at the site were reported in 2007, where the combination of great age and sophistication created quite a stir. Sources This glossary entry is a part of the About.com guide to Upper Paleolithic , and the Dictionary of Archaeology. Anikovich MV, Sinitsyn AA, Hoffecker JF, Holliday VT, Popov VV, Lisitsyn SN, Forman SL, Levkovskaya GM, Pospelova GA, Kuzmina IE et al. 2007. Early Upper Paleolithic in Eastern Europe and Implications for the Dispersal of Modern Humans. Science 315(5809):223-226. Hoffecker JF. 2011. The early upper Paleolithic of eastern Europe reconsidered. Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews 20(1):24-39. Revedin A, Aranguren B, Becattini R, Longo L, Marconi E, Mariotti Lippi M, Skakun N, Sinitsyn A, Spiridonova E, and Svoboda J. 2010. Thirty thousand-year-old evidence of plant food processing. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107(44):18815-18819. Seguin-Orlando A, Korneliussen TS, Sikora M, Malaspinas A-S, Manica A, Moltke I, Albrechtsen A, Ko A, Margaryan A, Moiseyev V et al. 2014. Genomic structure in Europeans dating back at least 36,200 years. ScienceExpress 6 November 2014(6 November 2014) doi: 10.1126/science.aaa0114. Soffer O, Adovasio JM, Illingworth JS, Amirkhanov H, Praslov ND, and Street M. 2000. Palaeolithic perishables made permanent. Antiquity 74:812-821. Svendsen JI, Heggen HP, Hufthammer AK, Mangerud J, Pavlov P, and Roebroeks W. 2010. Geo-archaeological investigations of Palaeolithic sites along the Ural Mountains - On the northern presence of humans during the last Ice Age. Quaternary Science Reviews 29(23-24):3138-3156. Svoboda JA. 2007. The Gravettian on the Middle Danube. Paleobiology 19:203-220. Velichko AA, Pisareva VV, Sedov SN, Sinitsyn AA, and Timireva SN. 2009. Paleogeography of Kostenki-14 (Markina Gora). Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia 37(4):35-50. doi: 10.1016/j.aeae.2010.02.002

Assignment Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words - 70

Assignment - Essay Example t of view which is used to express a characters feelings or attitude in a detailed manner, second person point of view, which is used mainly to attract the reader’s attention from the beginning and third person point of view which may be used to introduce a dual point of view from the author and characters of the piece. The author of shame, Dick Gregory, employs the use of the first person point of view. This perspective is effective in creating an intimate relationship with the reader since all emotions and attitudes expressed in the narrative are from the author’s point of view. This technique is quite flexible and subjective because it allows the author to portray a stream of consciousness while conducting an interior monologue. However, this point of view is impaired because the opinions in the narrative are from a particular individual. The author of Propaganda Techniques in Today’s Advertising, employs the use of a third person point of view. She gives the readers insight into what she believes are propaganda fed to citizens by advertising mediums. This technique, allows the author to express her opinion while also expressing the opinion of other individuals on the same topic. This is a convenient and trustworthy way of passing information through an unbiased point of view. It also provides the author with great flexibility when writing the article. The author employs the use of an omniscient narrator, who is well aware of all the information required in describing the article. This perspective is employed when a certain degree of objectivity is required. It is also quite efficient in directing the reader’s attention to the idea being

Waste Management in Fonterra Tirau Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

Waste Management in Fonterra Tirau - Assignment Example Tirau site produces both technical and edible casein, manufacturing about 7000 tonnes per year for export to the USA, China, Japan and Europe. Fonterra Tirau contribute a lot to the South Waikato community and its members. Fonterra Tirau site conducts regular neighborhood clean-ups and helps the unpaid assistant fire brigade in their activities. Biogas produced from the site’s waste water treatment system is used to partly fuel the site’s boilers. Fonterra Tirau site owns one of the largest waste water treatment plants in the Southern part of Hemisphere and all other sites in the region relays on this site (Franklin, R 2007). A detailed EIA report that was submitted to Waikato department of Environment should have the following details which are the main components of EIA: Screening, Scoping, prediction and mitigation, management and monitoring or audit. Screening is the process of deciding on whether an EIA is required. EIA may be based on site-specific information. For example in this case before the Tirau site was established EIA should have been conducted because it is likely to cause a lot of environmental issues which require to be properly mitigated. Guidelines for whether or not an EIA is required will be country specific depending on the laws or norms in operation (Manning 1986). Scoping is conducted early in the project cycle at the same time as outline planning and pre-feasibility studies. Scoping is the process of identifying the key environmental issues and is perhaps the most important step in an EIA. Decision makers, the local community and the technical community, have an interest in assisting to premeditate the issues which should be dealt with (Wathern, 1988). Prediction and mitigation follows once the scoping process is finished once the major impacts to be studied have been identified, prediction and mitigation measures are then discussed. Mitigation is defined as a set of